Treść książki

Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
38
Chapter1
Thesimilaritiesanddifferencesbetweenlanguageswerestudiedtopre-
dictalearner’sdifficulties(Arabski1979,Fisiak1991),butthehuman
skilltotranslatewasrarelyusedasawindowonthetwoopposingpara-
digms:UGversuslinguisticrelativity(withfewexceptions,i.e.Lewan-
dowska-Tomaszczyk1985).Linguisticallyconfinedreasoningwhenap-
pliedtotranslationallowedonlyfortheoreticaldiscussionsofequivalence
anduntranslatabilitywithoutreferencetoactualtranslationpractice
(HatimandBasil1990).
AccordingtoBerman(1989)theoreticallinguistshavenorealinterest
intranslationstudiesalthoughlinguisticscontinuesinawaytoinsistthat
translationisaproperobjectoflinguisticinvestigationasitisabletooffer
aconceptualanalyticalframeworkforthestudyoftranslation.However,“it
definestranslationinsuchanabstractwaythatitignoresalmostentirelythe
writtenandtextualaspectsoftheact,nottomentionitsculturalandhistori-
caldimensions”(Fawcett1997:144).Fawcett(1997)arguesthoughthat
linguisticdiscoursealthoughnotabletocircumscribetranslation,“hasa
roletoplayandavoicewhichwillnotbesilenced”(Fawcett1997:144).
Indeed,therelationshipbetweenlinguisticsandthestudyoftranslation
hasbeenatroubledone(Fawcet1997).Itisquiteriskytoguesshowmany
linguists,whethertheoreticalorapplied,wouldseebenefitsinthestudyof
translation?LookingatlinguisticsandTranslationStudiesoneislikelyto
noticethatthereluctanceisnotone-sidedbutrathermutual.Snell-Hornby
(2006)inherrecentpublication,TheTurnsofTranslationStudiesexpressed
herworriesthatsometranslationscholarsmightwanttoputanendtothe
troubledrelationshipbetweenTSandLinguistics,sayingthat,
Thisimpressionandparticularlytheobservationthatthependulumis
swingingbacktothepast,wasformeconfirmedatthecloseofthe
ThirdESTCongressin2001,whentherewasaninformalgeneralses-
siontogiveparticipantstheopportunitytocommentonthecontents
andresultsoftheconference.Theyoungergenerationinparticularwere
invitedtopresenttheiropinions.Moststrikingforanyonefamiliarwith
thecourseofthedebateoverthelastthirtyyearswasthetendencyno-
ticeablebothinthetopicsoftheconferenceprogrammeandinthe
commentsofthatclosingsession,“BacktoLinguistics”(cf.Snell-
Hornby2002).Isthetranslationalwheeltobereinventedyetagain?
Despitethepromiseof“newtoolsandmethods”(Chesterman2002),it
mightseemsoindeed(Snell-Hornby2006:151).